Post navigation

The Smoke Chambers

There are still people who don’t want to draw parallels between the treatment of smokers in the present day and the treatment of a whole host of people in Hitler’s day. It wasn’t just the Jews, you know.

Okay, the queasiness is understandable because smokers are not yet being marched off to death camps. However, there are calls to register us all via ‘smoking licences’ in Australia and it has been mentioned in the UK. In America, if you smoke and rent, some places will demand that you register as a smoker and that your location is published on a map, as it is for paedos and rapists, so when Kristallnacht II arrives they know where to find you (story tipped by Tornface in comments).

So, okay, there are not yet parallels with the gas chambers and the concentration camps. There are, however, increasing parallels with the progression of actions in the days before the camps came about and to ignore that because ‘ooo, it’s not nice to pretend you are as persecuted as the Jews’ is to ignore history.

Those who ignore history will repeat it. It wasn’t just the Jews last time, remember, and it won’t be just the smokers this time.

There is much talk about how many people Hitler killed. Actually, he hardly killed any. He might not have personally killed anyone.

Millions of people were slaughtered, not by Hitler, but by drones who enjoyed the petty powers they gained under Hitler’s rule. Drones who loved nothing more than to put on a uniform and push other people around and yes, they regarded it as their right to decide who lived and who died. If they are not going to live as directed then ‘they’ll just have to die’. Heard that anywhere recently?

Take a deep breath, put aside any prejudices you may have, and look objectively at the world. Do you see any people like those Nazi drones out there now?

22 thoughts on “The Smoke Chambers”

Some of you may know that I’ve been working on a project for the last few years: a book titled “TobakkoNacht — Fighting The Antismokers’ Endgame.”

It’s not a replacement for, or even a sequel to, my Dissecting book. I see it instead as something of an extensive add-on or supplement to Brains: something for those who’ve read the first book and think it was good enough to deserve an expansion.

The first part of the book consists of a rather long short story — just on the borderline of being classed as a novelette (7,500 words) — that gives its title to book as a whole. I haven’t really talked much about the book before because I want it to be judged on its content rather than on its title, and because its content will extend far beyond a simple short future fiction dystopia story.

I actually *did* put the story up on Amazon’s kindle a bit over three years ago though, and anyone here who’d like to read it (either on Kindle or on their computer with the Amazon’s Kindle-to-PC program) is welcome to check it out over there. The original was written in the late 1990s, and the “Bear Killer” introduction was added in the early 2000s. The bulk of the story as it appears on Kindle (and as it will appear in the book upon publication near the end of this year) has remained almost unchanged except for a few sentences in the “Kindling” “historical” section, and I’ve always felt sad that I wasn’t confident enough in it to put it out when first written. Unfortunately the early feedback I got on it from some friends was that it was just “too crazy” and its publication would end up labeling me as such a “tin-foil hat” person that Brains itself would be destroyed by it.

Heh, over the last year or two my new worry has been whether I’ll get it out before it simply becomes a history book! ::sigh::

In any event, if you’d like to see my own version of “KristallNacht II” just look up TobakkoNacht on Kindle.

LOL! Leg, I don’t want to say anything that would give away an essential plot element, but I’d suggest you re-read the last section. :>

I *did* miss a couple of fine points in my predictions though. It never occurred to me in the 90s that “third hand smoke” would ever make it beyond the walls of the funny farm or that smoking on beaches and in parks might be commonly banned by the mid 20teens. The earliest hint of that, when Regina Carlson of NJ GASP nattered on about beach smoking being ” a fire hazard” in 2002ish was still too totally nutso to think it would ever be taken seriously.

For those not familiar:
It’s not surprising that California lead the “antismoking way” post-WWII, now even enacting widespread outdoor bans and looking into “thirdhand smoke danger”. It is a continuation of its strong eugenics heritage. California performed, by far, more sterilizations than any other state in the first half of the last century.http://www.uvm.edu/~lkaelber/eugenics/CA/CA.html

However, the California elites – particularly the Regents of the University of California – still have a strong eugenics proclivity. The emphasis has been shifted from physical sterilization to social sterilization along the behavioral dimension of eugenics, e.g., antismoking.

How long before they sterilize smokers, I wonder? I’ll bet they’ve thought about it. Then drinkers, then the obese… think how much taxpayer’s money they’ll save by not having to take all those children of unapproved parents into care.

The drones will support it and they will think themselves intelligent for doing so.

The brainwashed are convinced that if there are no “death camps”, if there is no mass murder, then there’s no problem. Unless they see only one possible, extreme conclusion of denormalization – dehumanization, then all must be well. They are quite happy to ride the current State-sponsored bandwagon and would yet ask how those silly people back in Nazi Germany could “let that happen”. It’s split-mindedness; the mind is not capable of comparing the trends. Some have suggested that the water supply has been “gotten to” in an attempt to explain this blindness, even in the face of recent history and the advantage of hindsight. We may not even need a “tainted water supply” explanation. Populations around the world – and particularly in the English-speaking West – appear to be suffering terminal superficiality. Then add to this that we are more medicated with potent prescription drugs that further addle thinking, particularly amongst the bourgeoisie and the upper class, than ever before. Coherence and depth of thought don’t seem to come too easily. We’re easy fodder for manipulations of base emotions such as fear and hatred that serve the deranged ideology and vested financial interests of a self-installed, delusional, deceptive elite.

My nearest Supermarket has a monster car park and beneath it, ie underground, three more levels. Oddly enough it get full of cars. With engines. And exhaust pipes.
In the last week it has been liberally decorated on walls and pillars with bright red “No Smoking” signs.
I still don’t really know what to say or think. The stupid fucking idiots.
This really is some sort of collective lunacy. What does history teach about how or if it will end?

Or is it possible that people do see it quite clearly, but don’t even want to think about it.
Too nasty, too scary, that was then , this is now, couldn’t possibly happen here, nothing to do with me etc. etc.

That’s what the Germans would have thought under Hitler, the Cambodians when Pol Pot came to power, the Russians under Stalin, the North Koreans who let the first of the current wave of hereditary monsters take over, the Romans under Caligula and later, Nero, and so on. Don’t like it, don’t see it, it’s not really there.

Hi Leg Iron. Off topic I know so I’ll apologise in advance. I just wondered which e cig you, or indeed your reader would recommend. I remember reading of two you had recommended a long time ago but I don’t recall their names now. Great blog by the way. Cheers in advance, Tom.

Godwin’s Law. I have read up on this, and it is neither clear or a law. It strikes me as as something similar to the Tobacco Control Industry’s legislation fobidding debate with any person or body connected with the tobacco industry, which seems to include consumers of tobacco. So, if one trys to present any similarities in tobacco control to antyhing Nazi, one is shot down with a double barrel shotgun, Godwin’s Law and Tobacco Control’s Law.

They use it to mean that any comparison to the Nazis loses the argument, but it doesn’t mean that. They are too dim to understand that arguments are won and lost on the basis of reasoning, not because your opponent uses a word or phrase you have arbitrarily declared as ‘lose’. But then, those oafs don’t do ‘reasoning’.

It’s no different to all the Socialists shouting ‘Racist!’ as soon as anyone mentions immigration. Anyone declaring Godwin’s Law as their way of winning an argument has the wit and wisdom of a festering pool of smugness made out of ocelot vomit and donkey diarrhoea and is therefore far too stupid to bother with.

That, I suspect, is likely to end up on Wikipedia as ‘Leg-iron’s Law’. One day.

Goodwins Law was used originally to stop people just calling out “You’re a Nazi”, when there was no contextual reason for doing so, not as a tool to stifle debate.

With regards to the current anti-smoker stance going around at the moment and the whole “denormalisation” of smoking, well, it does bear a striking resemblance to the German Jews in the ’30’s. People forget that it wasn’t just a case of Hitler waking up in the morning and going “Well I hate the Jews, lets kill them”. The process took years, and then when the people were good and ready…..

The process is being repeated again, this time with people who aren’t a single identifiable group, smokers, drinkers, fatty food eaters, etc, etc. hence making the comparison, slightly tenuous, but still valid from technical standpoint. The major problem that we have at this point is that too many people will follow any order given to them by any person with a perceived position of authority, so when the order comes for the persecution of any groups that those in charge do not like, the masses will follow without question.

I smoke on the beach all the time in San Diego, California, where it was first mistakenly made into a crime. If approached by a po;iceman or nosy ignoramus who tell me it is illegal, I just tell them I am starting a barbeque and my religion insists I use a a smoke for that purpose. Thank God these folks insist on religeous freedom. Perhaps you should try it out in the U.K.